On Mon, Jun 23, 2014 at 8:20 AM, Adam Roach <adam@nostrum.com> wrote: > On 6/23/14 09:32, Emil Ivov wrote: > >> Personally I thought it was an oversight in the FF implementation >> > > No; starting with the W3C spec (because we're talking about a JS API > here), we reached the same conclusion as Iñaki did, using the same (rather > obvious) chain of logic. It is most assuredly not an oversight, as we've > had to take extra steps to process the candidates that Chrome generates: > > http://dxr.mozilla.org/mozilla-central/source/media/ > webrtc/signaling/src/sipcc/core/gsm/fsmdef.c#4148 > > There were discussions about that at the interim in Boston and then >> again in Orlando... >> > > Orlando? Ah, I see the confusion here. Iñaki is talking about a W3C API. > You're talking about... actually, wait. I don't know what you're talking > about. The W3C didn't meet in Orlando, and the IETF doesn't specify > Javascript APIs. As Adam says, this is totally clear in the W3C API and Firefox is behaving correctly. I don't want to speak for Justin, but IIRC we discussed this a while ago and he agreed that it was a bug in Chrome, so I assume it's just an oversight it hasn't been fixed. -Ekr
Received on Monday, 23 June 2014 18:12:48 UTC